UNCLASSIFIED
Report on Quality at Entry and Next Steps to Complete Design for the
World Bank funded Mozambique Water Services and Institutional Support Project
A: AidWorks details completed by Activity ManagerInitiative Name: / TBA
AidWorks ID: / TBA / Total Amount: / $17.25 million
Start Date: / May 2010 / End Date: / 30 June 2011
B: Appraisal Peer Review meeting details completed by Activity Manager
Initial ratings prepared by: / Jim Catchlove
Ross Kearton
Meeting date: / 10 February 2010
Chair: / Jamie Isbister, ADG, Africa, Humanitarian and PeaceBuilding Branch
Peer reviewersproviding formal comment ratings: / Jim Catchlove, Procurements and Agreements section, AusAID
Ross Kearton, Water Supply Design Engineer, Cardno Acil
Independent Appraiser: / Ross Kearton, Water Supply and Design Engineer, Cardno Acil
Other peer review participants: / Alan Coulthart, Principle Infrastructure Adviser
Rachel Kelleher, Infrastructure, Water & Sanitation Section
Kirsty McNicol, Director, Infrastructure, Water & Sanitation Section
Laurence McCulloch, Working in Partner Systems Unit
Gillian Brown, Principal Gender Adviser
Percy Stanley, Counsellor, Pretoria Post
Peter Duncan-Jones - Maputo
Jason Court, Pretoria Post
Matt Kellam, Africa Section
Clare Hanley, Africa Section
Apologies:
Pat Duggan, A/g Director, Africa Section
Nic Notarpietro, Quality and Performance Management Section
Matthew Fehre, Working in Partner Systems
Gina De Pretto, Development Banks Section
Marcus Howard, Infrastructure Adviser
Elena Down, Disability Inclusive Development
Kathleen Burke, Development Banks Section
Anne Joselin, Infrastructure, Water & Sanitation Section
C: Quality Rating Assessment against indicators
completed by Activity Manager / Peer Reviewers / Independent Appraiser
Quality / Rating
(1-6) * / Comments to support rating / Required Action
(if needed)
- Clear objectives
The objectives are in line with the goals of the Africa Water and Sanitation Program and will contribute to the achievement of MDG 7. The objectives are clear and measurable but the timeframe for completion is until 2012 rather than the completion of AWSP funding in June 2011. It may be difficult to achieve the institutional objectives by June 2011.
The project assists the Government of Mozambique to implement its national water plan. There is clear support from the Government of Mozambique for the project. / Clearly state the objectives of the additional financing in the DSID
- Monitoring and Evaluation
Quarterly reports will be provided to the World Bank covering progress on outcome indicators, progress on procurement and a review of financial operations. In addition, AusAID and the World Bank will undertake six-monthly reviews.
Monitoring will be undertaken by the regulatory authority (CRA) with support from the WASIS program. This will build the capacity of local monitoring systems.
- Sustainability
The project levers off substantial investments by other development agencies (including World Bank and Millennium Challenge Corporation) allowing continuation beyond AusAID’s investment.
This is a pilot approach which may require modification during and after implementation to deliver a sustainable outcome – this needs to be acknowledged.
Sustainability of the project will depend largely on cost recovery and the willingness of users to pay for the service. This is a risk. Projected water consumption of 40L/cap/d also appears quite low(this was discussed in depth at the peer review – see comments in Section E below).
- Implementation Risk Management
Implementation arrangements are well aligned with other donors and involve local agencies.
The primary risk is the failure of the DMF approach in the small cities and towns. These are pilot schemes for this approach so even if not completely successful, important lessons will be learned for the future roll-out of the DMF in other towns. The short timeframe for implementation may limit the ability of the project to adjust should the DMF approach not be easily transferable.
The main risks and plans to prevent or mitigate them have been identified.
Quality control mechanisms appear sound. Physical works will be supervised by consultants appointed under WB procurement procedures. Water service providers will be supported by capacity building consultants and the Brazilian association of Water Companies will support the national water sector training establishment.
- Analysis and lessons
A gender analysis and strategy has been prepared by consultants funded by AusAID and environmental and social implications have been considered. Anti-corruption issues have been identified. No consideration given to child protection or people with disabilities.
Program logic is sound although it may be difficult to complete the objectives within the timeframe for the AWSP funding.
The analysis does take into account the critical role of partnerships - the role of FIPAG and CRA is identified as critical in providing support to AIAS and the PWBs. Capacity building from the WASIS project for the provincial and district agencies will also be essential.
The rationale for AusAID’s participation is strong. / Incorporate consideration of people with disabilities into the DSID.
Consider contingencies in the event the project is delayed and not completed within the AWSP timeframe(once the design is finalised).
* Definitions of the Rating Scale:
Satisfactory (4, 5 and 6) / Less than satisfactory (1, 2 and 3)
6 / Very high quality; needs ongoing management monitoring only / 3 / Less than adequate quality; needs to be improvedin core areas
5 / Good quality; needs minor work to improve in some areas / 2 / Poor quality; needs major work to improve
4 / Adequate quality; needs some work to improve / 1 / Very poor quality; needs major overhaul
D: Next Steps completed by Activity Manager after agreement at the Appraisal Peer Review meeting
Provide information on all steps required to finalise the design based on Required Actionsin "C" above, and additional actions identified in the peer review meeting / Who is responsible / Date to be done
- Revise the DSID to clearly state the objectives of AusAID’s additional financing of the WASIS project.
- Revise the DSID to incorporate consideration of people with disabilities.
E: Other commentsor issues completed by Activity Manager after agreement at the APR meeting
Cost recovery to ensure sustainability of the project and the projected low water consumption of 40L/cap/d was discussed at the peer review meeting. The answers provided satisfied the appraisers so no further required actions are included in the QAE. The key points of the discussion were:
- This is a key risk and has been mitigated by designing a water service that is suitable to the local conditions. By planning for a low level of water consumption the infrastructure costs can be kept down to reduce household costs.
- Communities will be consulted throughout the design phase to ensure the water services adequately meet their needs and to raise awareness of the new service.
- Subsidies will be provided (by the World Bank) during a transitional period to encourage new consumers to use the new water system and increase cost recovery.
F: Approval completed by ADG or Minister-Counsellor who chaired the peer review meeting
On the basis of the final agreed QualityRating assessment (C) and Next Steps (D) above:
QAE REPORT IS APPROVED, andauthorization given to proceed to:
FINALISE the design incorporating actions above, andproceed to implementation
or: REDESIGNand resubmit for appraisal peer review
NOT APPROVED for the following reason(s):
Jamie Isbister
ADG/AHPB / Signed: / Date:
When complete:
- Copy and paste the approved ratings, explanation and actions (table C) into AidWorks
- The original signed report must be placed on a registered file
Quality at Entry Report Template for Activity Managers, registered # 088UNCLASSIFIED page 1 of 4
Business Process Owner: Technical Group Manager, Quality and Performance ManagementTemplate current to30 June 2010